Troops Direct
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 273046842
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- McKinney, TX, USA
- Phone
- 8779787667
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,615,534
- Expenses
- $5,823,701
- Assets
- $2,629,943
- Liabilities
- $2,448,697
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Aaron Negherbon (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Aaron Negherbon (Executive Director): $180,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Troops Direct augments the United States military supply chain by providing American forces with critically needed items that cannot be accessed through conventional government channels.
What it reported doing in 2024
Troops Direct supplies globally positioned United States military units in bulk with items that may not be issued or readily available through government channels. The Troops Direct fulfillment model is request based and primarily ships medical, nutrition, hygiene, equipment, and canine items. This is done at no expense to the taxpayer or the requesting units. Troops Direct is there first and foremost for the service members who are based out of, or deploying to, smaller or more remote positions where needed supplies are non-existent or not readily available. Troops Direct makes the difference now. No red tape, bureaucracies, or chains of command. Just a commitment to those who serve.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 96% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 92
- Transparency & Controls: 68
- Accountability: 94
- Sustainability: 24
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 94.4%; rating input score 94
- Program expense ratio: 90.9%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: $101.77 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 93.6%; rating input score 94; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -3.7%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.93; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.1%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 94.4% of revenue deployed · 90.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $180K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.